Sunday, March 19, 2017

Didn't the entire universe recommend this book? I felt stupid not having read it yet, considering the raving reviews it received. I thought my eyeballs would begin to hurt if I saw another recommendation for Eleanor and Park and still didn't read it. I had no preconceived notions about it--of course it would be a great book because everyone loves it. The cover is minimalist, the new trend for contemporary books, and even though it was romance, I thought I could survive it.

Lesson learned: Popular belief can be a LIE. I dived into this book knowing it'll be awesome, but I was terribly disappointed.

First, I'll mention some positive aspects of it (there were indeed a few) before delving into things that made me give a 2 star rating to Eleanor and Park.

~Pros~

1. Non-typical characters. High school stories generally feature impossibly perfect teenagers (at least in the way they look), but that wasn't the case with this book. Eleanor is the opposite of society's ideal (and it is reflected through the book as people form prejudiced opinions about her) and it stays like that. Park is quiet, cute and Asian (which apparently makes him less-than-perfect, according to the story).

2. The background of the story that makes you feel the FEELS. I love books that make me FEEL. (You know what I mean, right?) Even though the FEELS here were mostly angst and sadness and anxiety and anger, but still.

Okay, I've thought enough and there seems to be nothing else that made me like this book. Let's get to the point.

~Cons~

1. Character development (or the lack of it): Eleanor and Park fell in love so swiftly I couldn't catch it. One moment they're hating each other and the next they're holding hands and the next they're declaring their love! For some reason, whatever love-talk they did made me feel NOTHING. It felt like a lie. Which sucks.

Besides, as quickly as they fell in love, their mental/emotional development was just as slow. It actually didn't even seem to take place, to be frank. I understand that Eleanor's life is upsetting and too hard to cope with. She can't deal with good developments in the same way as her peers. But what about Park? What about Eleanor's family? (I just about HATED Eleanor's mother.)

2. The focus of the story, or the plot. The book's central idea was about two star-crossed lovers/teens, but I felt the story was heavily populated by Eleanor's family troubles that are not even resolved till the end! And what about the clumsy ending? WHAT WAS THAT?

3. Characters behaving stupidly. If things are getting intense on the emotional parameter, at least get the characters to be in sync with the emotions they are supposed to be portraying. So many things seemed off balance. For instance, Park 'rescuing' Eleanor and then feeling angry when she's sleeping instead of talking to him (no, the fact that she's scared for her life doesn't count).

4. The writing style. The alternate narration with some overlaps was successful in displaying different POVs of the same events but it soon became tiring and monotonous, looking like unnecessary additions that made the book longer than it should have been.

5. Supporting characters. None of them was likeable. They were either too mean, or too weak, or too prejudiced, and then when they had to change to become better, they became the opposite extreme. Subtlety and realism is heavily lacking in this book.

*sigh* I feel so sad having written this, but it's just the true state of affairs. However, I'm also a very moody reader in the sense that my own mood makes me like or dislike a book even more. Many people have loved this book. You may go check out further reviews on Goodreads if you want some other perspective. Take your call, but if you read the book after reading this review, or if you've read it at all, I'd love to know what you think of it!

PS-Rainbow Rowell has written more books which have received great ratings (such as Fangirl, Attachments and Carry On. You might want to check those out. I haven't read them yet but from the reviews I've read, it seems like Eleanor & Park isn't her best book.)

Wednesday, February 8, 2017

Why am I not surprised that I adored this book so much? Because Goodreads can't be wrong. Lately it has become my one-stop-shop for book picks and it rarely disappoints. I had been wanting to read a light, nice contemporary book and Simon vs The Homosapiens Agenda came to my book pile. The cover was intriguing, and I hadn't really read a book relating to sexual identity before.

Simon is gay, and he has been emailing Blue (identity unknown), a boy attending the same high-school. They keep their real identities hidden from each other, because neither of them has had their 'coming out' moment. Simon's not sure when he'd be ready--he knows that his family would be accepting, but with their annoying tendency to be over-enthusiastic about anything he does beyond their pre-conceived notions of him, it's a bit difficult. Then there's the whole idea of being bullied by school kids. One day, though, Simon's emails to Blue are read by his classmate, who begins to blackmail him. The story moves forward combining Simon toiling for, sometimes avoiding, Martin, fearing that he would spill his secret when he isn't ready. We meet Simon's friends and go through their lives as well, and we feel Simon's pangs to know the real Blue.

It was quite a refreshing read, actually. The writing is simple and fun, the (almost) typical contemporary narration making it a quick and easy read.
However, the fact that I couldn't put it down unless I had read till the end
proves that, at least for a picky reader like me, the book serves well to break
any reading slump you might be facing. Also, it gives you perspective. How do you feel about being gay and unable to come out with it? Does society or the idea of bullying scare you? Do you get pissed off when straight people find it difficult to admit they like someone of the opposite gender? How do you perceive a friend or schoolmate who's gay?

1. The perfect balance of family understanding and discord.
People are there for Simon, but don't exactly make it easy for him to 'come
out' because of their tendency to highlight anything out of the ordinary.

2. Characters. I liked how Alice, Simon's elder sister,
remained in the background for most of the book but still comes across as a
supportive and fun sister. Simon is likeable enough, and he seems realistically
vulnerable when he begins being blackmailed by Martin. He's a fun mix of weird and nice. I liked many more character portrayals, but what I liked more was how they were balanced throughout the book. No overdose of any single character.

3. The school setting. This is purely personal because I hadn't read a book with a school setting since maybe Vampire Academy? Who knows. I, for one, don't keep a tab on book settings. I have a hard time remembering character names the next day. Anyway, the school setting made it 'refreshing' for me. It has also been realistically done. (I don't know how realistic it is though, to have many people who'd support gay rights when they're teenagers. I hope it is very much real!)

4. The mystery. All things apart, the constant mystery of Blue's real identity could have been the prime reason I couldn't put the book down! Minor spoiler alert: For a long time I felt I knew who he was, but then I didn't. Tch.

5. Ms. Albright, the drama teacher. Particularly towards the ending, she turned into a badass woman who won't tolerate bullying. She was quite likeable from the start, though, as a teacher who makes things funny and comfortable for the students by, say, speaking in their language.

6. The ultimate meeting of Simon and Blue!!! The revelation of Blue. I was hugely anticipating someone as Blue, though it was also somehow unimaginable, but then it ended up being someone I had also imagined as a possible Blue but it had seemed irrelevant at that time. Looking back, the subtle foreshadowing was CUTE. I don't even know it anything in this para makes sense. Writing without spoilers is no good. *sigh*

What my ebook copy looked like when I went to the park to read

~Things I did NOT enjoy~

1. Character development when it comes to Simon's friends. Simon's own character development isn't
intense per se, but visible enough for readers to note. However, I did wonder
why Abby and Nick didn't seem to be bothered about Leah. [The following text COULD be a character personality spoiler for some, so read at your own risk.] They both seemed to
have been self-absorbed. I get that Leah's behaviour wasn't exactly rational, but
Simon handled it way better than the other two. And if I were the choose
between Leah and Abby, it would be Leah because Abby, no matter how friendly and cute, was
ALWAYS oblivious to Leah and sometimes I was all, 'Doesn't this girl think before
speaking stuff?' When I read some Goodreads reviews before getting to this book
(not always a great idea. There's always a spoiler), some of them seemed to
think Leah's behaviour as selfish. I expected it to be, but ended up feeling quite
the opposite. [end of probable spoiler]

2. The play/musical taking up a huge portion of the reader's time, which made me anticipate something AMAZING during the actual play, but things seemed... normal. Sure, there were a couple of things that happened, but nothing worth the hype. What happened with the homecoming was perfectly balanced, in fact.

Another book series I didn’t read while the world was going
crazy about it. (I just DON’T know what’s with my aversion to reading books at
the same time as others). I wish I had read it before. City of Bones introduces
us to a new world—dark, mysterious and fascinating—a world that’s closely
intertwined with ours, visible only to those with the Sight. There are humans,
of course (called ‘mundanes’ because we can’t see the real excitement in the
world, I guess) and then there are Shadowhunters, who are part human and part
angel. The Mortal Cup is an instrument that was used to make the first
Shadowhunters (by mixing in blood of humans and angels and getting a
prospective Shadowhunter to drink it. I’d have thought a vampire would like it
more). There are also the Downworlders, creatures that have demonic blood or
tendencies in them (include everything else—vampires, werewolves, faeries,
etc). In City of Bones, we see how all these worlds mix up in the quest to
fight the feared Shadowhunter-gone-wrong called Valentine, who wants the world
full of “pure blood” Shadowhunters and absolutely no demons.

That’s the background. The story is narrated in third
person, but the central character of the story is Clarissa (Clary) Fray, a
fifteen year old living in Brooklyn with her mother, Jocelyn. She has a best
friend, Simon. One evening when Clary and Simon are visiting the popular
hangout club Pandemonium, Clary witnesses a murder. The baffling thing was, the
victim’s body evaporated and she was the only one who could see the
killers—teenagers just like herself. Clary is drawn into a world she had no
memories of, meets people she should have known but doesn’t, and realizes that
what she knew about herself was barely true.

City of Bones has a compelling storyline. Though I could
draw some parallels with other books (such as Harry Potter), I do think that this
story stands on its own, particularly in terms of characters and their
motivations. The author lays heavy emphasis on past events, relationships and
emotions of characters to control their behaviour in the present. Every
character has a backstory that validates their actions or thoughts, and it
feels so realistic. That’s probably one of the best things about this book.
Sure, there were some places where the characters seemed to be acting on sudden
impulses or had changed emotions in a jiffy, which felt too rushed to me, but
it wasn’t really bothersome. The characters are memorable, to say the least.

There is a good amount of action and suspense too, fairly
presented and well-spaced. Because the story focuses on family dynamics too,
one of the major twists pertained to familial ties, and it was indeed so surprising,
I totally did NOT see it coming. Another thing I found different and “fresh”
about a YA novel such as this was that it also touches upon sensitive themes such
as family separation, being an outcast and homosexuality.

Some parts in the story were quite touching and sad. Needless
to say, I loved the balanced mix of everything. It was appealing in a curious
way… despite all the darkness, the raw discomfort of what was happening, I
couldn’t put the book down. At first, it was interesting but not as gripping as
I thought it would be—I had a feeling it was overrated—but it seemed to pick up
pace after about 40% and then it was hard to put it down. I did read a lot of
it while I should have been working. The writing style is good… pretty normal,
I guess, because I didn’t observe it that much, except that some really good
vocab is used in places and I was just wondering how each character has such a
good repertoire of vocab.

This book came as a ‘different’ kind of story compared with
the ones I’d been reading the past two years. It relates more to the YA books I
read while in college, and the reading experience felt very good. I’ve begun to
read City of Ashes (The Mortal Instruments #2) and I’m already excited!! Any of
you read these books?

(Sharing some quotes from the book below):

“The boy never cried again, and he never forgot
what he'd learned: that to love is to destroy, and that to be loved is to be
the one destroyed.”

“Where there is love, there is often also hate.
They can exist side by side.”

“All knowledge hurts.”

PS- I'm not much of a movie person but I just saw that there's a movie on this!!!! I don't like the feel of the characters (in the photographs) though. Books are always so much better.

Saturday, October 15, 2016

Hercule Poirot is a Belgian detective, a short, sharp man
popularised by Agatha Christie in her many novels. I hadn't read a lot of her
books before. Only a couple of Miss Marple books and a handful of general ones.
They were fairly enjoyable, till the time I read The Murder on the Orient Express, and getting introduced to Hercule
Poirot. I began to think of it as the best Agatha Christie book I'd read!
Recently I grabbed Peril at End House
and The Murder of Roger Ackroyd,
wishing to savour some more of Poirot's adventures. I'll talk about these two
books in the paras below:

Peril at End House:Hercule
Poirot is on a holiday with his loyal friend (read sidekick) Hastings when he
meets a young girl called Nick who seems to have had three escapes from death
in the last three days. Poirot is intrigued, especially when a shot is
attempted at Nick right in front of Poirot! Poirot convinces Nick that she is
in danger and she asks him for help. Nick lives in End House, a dilapidated old
house left to her by her grandfather. The story goes on to introduce Nick's
relatives and friends, all of whom are suspected by Poirot. The result is an
intriguing whodunnit that makes a reader's suspicions flow from one character
to the next.

I enjoyed reading this book and thinking along Hercule
Poirot as developments take place. Sometimes I paused to reflect on the quality
of writing, which didn't seem all that great. Add to it the expressions of
stereotypes on women, and it became a bit of a bother, but the story
nevertheless took over. Perhaps because I had The Murder on the Orient Express to compare with, but I did not
find Peril at End House as good as
expected. The main character, Nick, seemed too unreal in the way she behaved.
Still, I'd give it full points for the OMG factor and the unexpected ending.
The minus point? You feel like you HAVE to read the book again to figure out
how the crime was committed, but you usually don't have the time for it. And
you know this fact.

As for The Murder of Roger Ackroyd, I loved
reading it much more than Peril at End
House. Roger Ackroyd is apparently one of Christie’s masterpieces. Here,
Hercule Poirot has "retired" and gone to live in a small town where
he hopes to hide his identity (and ends up being thought of as a retired
hairdresser, thanks to his fabulous waxy moustache!). Of course, mysteries
follow detectives. Soon, there is a suicide and a murder, and Hercule Poirot is
called to help.

This story was interesting right from the beginning. The
narrator is one of the townspeople, a doctor, who takes the place of Poirot's
friend Hastings (as much as a stranger is capable, that is). The narrator, Dr
Sheppard, had been to dine with Roger Ackroyd, one of the rich men in town.
Ackroyd had been tense and had wanted to share a secret with Dr Sheppard, but
he is prevented from doing so. Later that night the doctor receives a phone
call that Ackroyd has been murdered, and a most intriguing story follows.

What with Poirot’s methods of working and so many clues and
suspects, the readers just can’t get enough of the story. It’s no wonder the
book is considered wonderful. It just is. For a change, I’m quite at a loss for
words to describe the book. Towards the end, I began to feel apprehensive about
the ending, and I dearly wished it to not
be what I thought it would be, and it was a disappointment when it turned
out to be exactly what I dreaded. Again, that feeling of wanting to re-read the
book!

Poirot seemed to resemble Sherlock in the sense of arriving
at the solution by thinking. However, Poirot is a proponent of utilising one's
"little grey cells" (of the brain) and has the habit of arriving at
the solution by taking into consideration every single truth/fact and going by
"method". He is great at human psychology, which makes his
problem-solving all the more alluring!

The best thing about these books is how they are so hard to
put down! I have never had more than a few hours' break while reading a book by
Agatha Christie. It's true even when I find some things tiresome or the writing
'basic'. The story just keeps having interesting developments, which obviously
is testimony to the fact that the stories are real gold. They may seem simple
on the surface, but I just love how the author plays around with it!

I recommend these books to fans of mystery and crime novels. Now I’m going to read some more Agatha Christie.

PS—Poirot is the only fictional character to be honored with
a front page obituary on The New York Times. No wonder!

PPS—The print and text quality of the books that I bought needs to be commented upon. It was so disappointing to find that the text had clearly not been proofread or looked at even once before the book was sent off for printing. Gross errors that greatly put me off while reading: sentences ending in a comma instead of a full stop, sentences with either beginning or ending quote marks missing, words spelled wrongly (weeek instead of week! The name Ursula written 'Ursual'). I'm sure the publishers wouldn't have bothered with it considering the brands--Agatha Christie and HarperCollins. Who would bother with typos? And I wasn't even surprised that the book was "For sale in the Indian subcontinent only". Who else accepts such books?

Wednesday, September 21, 2016

Angels and Demons is the first Robert Langdon
thriller in the amazing series by Dan Brown. I feel silly not having read this
before despite having a copy since ages! Brown's DaVinci Code and The
Lost Symbol had been immensely satisfying reads, and Angels and Demons
was just as enthralling. I love books that demand all your thoughts, emotions
and intellect to be concentrated on it at all times. I've been guilty of
reading AngelsandDemons while at work and way past my
bedtime. It is a book that engages one's intellectual curiosity and provides
for thrills, adventure, mystery with scenes that can leave one breathless.

What's inside?

Robert Langdon is an art historian teaching at Harvard. He
finds himself at CERN, the biggest scientific research organization located in
Switzerland, after the Director shows him an image of a brutally-murdered CERN
scientist. He had been "branded" with a mysterious symbol. Robert
Langdon finds the situation impossible: he had done some research on the
Illuminati and the symbol indicated their resurgence.

Religion and science have always been at loggerheads with
each other. The fabled intellectual group that called themselves the Illuminati
have resurfaced after decades of hiding, thought to have been extinct by the
world. And they have their target in sight--Vatican City, the holiest church.
Langdon and Vittoria, the murdered scientist's daughter, leave for Rome to
locate the canister of antimatter--that which was stolen after the scientist's
death--to prevent it from vaporizing Vatican City!

One of the book covers

How is the book?

Fantastic. The one thing I love about Dan Brown's books is
how the stories are set in such short time spans. Angels and Demons
covers Langdon's day beginning at 5.30 am till a little after midnight--packed
with historical information, action, suspense and a symbologist's quest towards
an impossible answer that could save the world. Readers will inevitably be
drawn to Rome's culture and rich art history apart from the marvellous secrets
buried within the Vatican.

The story, a race against time as the antimatter countdown
nears zero, is intense and quick-paced, Brown's writing style adding to
the effect. No words are wasted. The words are chosen carefully. The chapters
ending with cliffhangers are the best! I tried to guess the ultimate villain
and failed thrice. The book isn't a literary star, but it is totally absorbing.
There were some things that seemed a bit unbelievable to me, like how so much
could happen within minutes, but I'm not complaining. I was hooked onto the
story and felt as much in Vatican as Robert Langdon, decoding answers in
popular churches and artwork, trying to stay a step ahead of the enemy and
using all possible knowledge to find answers to save the Vatican from being
evaporated.

The short chapters moving from one scene to the next, in
different areas and different POVs add to the quick-paced nature of the
book. It has also been done seamlessly with no scope for reader disorientation.
I liked the background stories for all characters--they brought about
more depth in the characters. Robert Langdon is a unique character, one of
those whose image you can affix in your mind with just a brief introduction.
He's intelligent, witty and a little bit wacky. He gets into tough situations
because of his curiosity and a sense of responsibility, and it is fun to watch
him deal with the new people and circumstances as they arise.

Coming to facts, I've seen a lot of readers criticising the
book because it does not include proper facts and is
"anti-Christian". I'm not much aware about those facts, but I do know
that it is a fictional story that uses some pre-existing facts to base itself
upon. Reaching the end, I did feel that it threw a somewhat negative light on
the Catholic Church, but that was because of one of the characters. The book
ended with a clear message (according to the author anyway) of what
religion/Church stands for and how it is to be seen as separate from blind
faith or belief on the basis of fear. This is something I feel a lot of
religions deal with.

Nevertheless, I would recommend Angels and Demons to
fans of thrillers and to those who enjoyed DaVinci Code. Some language, scenes
and gory descriptions/killings might not be suitable for younger readers. Here
are a few quotes from the book:

“Nothing captures human interest more than human
tragedy.”

“Faith is universal. Our specific methods for
understanding it are arbitrary. Some of us pray to Jesus, some of us go to
Mecca, some of us study subatomic particles. In the end we are all just
searching for truth, that which is greater than ourselves.”

“Skepticism has become a virtue. Cynicism and demand for
proof has become enlightened thought. Is it any wonder that humans now feel
more depressed and defeated than they have at any point in human history? ”
(This comes from a long speech delivered at the Vatican in the story.)